I've read so many stories of people that were into them back in the 90's, were extremely excited for the full-length, and then got a third-tier brutal death metal album.

If you like their hardcore stuff, you should track down the Abnegation/Chapter split and the compilation CD, Stones to Mark a Fire. The latter release has the best Abnegation song (that they butchered on the full-length). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=miYxGSN_UcM

I have gradually grown VERY tired of the word "underrated". Yes, you may think an album or a band is underrated, but being underrated somehow implies that people know about it, and rate it below what it would deserve in your opinion, whatever that may be worth. However, if the band is one of those groups no-one has ever heard about, they can't be underrated, they are unknown.

Rating something, either over or under what you think is suitable, requires knowledge of the subject. If you wish to let everybody about a band they've never had a chance to hear, be honest about it and call it unknown, will you?

Of course, if it's one of those bands that made waves in the famous Black Metal Underground with their first demo, The Worm-infested Cabbage Brigade or something, my argument is immediately invalid, and I apologize.

And, of course, the "movie trailer voice" format. I always imagine Pablo Francisco reading them with a drunken grin on his face:

"The year is 2002. The scene is filled with garbage and posers, but two men decide to rise against the odds, and release an album to change the world, to rearrange the continents, and do the laundry. They catch the biggest red snapper in the frigid waters of Antarctica, record solos that either melt or carbonize faces, depending on whichever outcome is the scientifically valid one, and use bent screwdrivers to open cans of peaches to use in blasphemous drunken stunts..."

Yeah, use the past tense. It is NOT 2002 any more. If it was, I'd want it to be 1986 or thereabouts, and not 2002.

The first paragraph (read: sentence) of this review feels like the literary equivalent of an Escher painting. I must have read it at least 6 times now. Not to discern any deeper meaning or insight, just for the sheer enjoyment of the uncomfortable feeling it brings me.

I've only been on this site for week and man, alot of negativity in reviews haha. Sometimes I get the idea people purposefully give bad reviews to bands or genres they don't like :s (As in, Deathcore doesn't seem to be highly regarded around here)

As opposed to accidentally giving a negative review? Pretty sure the whole point of a negative review is that people don't like it, bucko...that's kind of the idea. And no there isn't "a lot of negativity" here. Just people talking about music.

People seem to interpret negative reviews as personal attacks on the musicians if the said reviews are on their favourite bands. Rest assured that a real, aggressive attack on the band members' personalities or whatnot is quite unlikely to pass the modding part of the reviewing process. If you specifically have any particular reviews in mind, please post links here, and we'll take a look.

Reviews are about music. The image or personalities are, of course, good additional material, and should not be ignored, but disliking the music or musicianship does not equal a personal attack on band members; it's an essential part of any review to state that if it indeed is the case.

Also, I've dealt with roughly sixteen squintillion overwhelmingly positive reviews since I've started this whole modding thing, and maybe a few dozen negative reviews, with even less lukewarm ones. People who say the reviews here are too negative simply A) aren't looking very hard/far within reviews, B) simply like bands/albums that many people don't, C) have a stick up their ass when it comes to "if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all", or D) all of the above.

I vastly prefer writing negative reviews. Feels more satisfying to tear apart something constructively than to build up an argument as to why something is good. Writing my recent Sepultura reviews, for instance, was more fun than writing my Running Wild fanboy ones. Positive reviews like that can be summed up as "listen to this NOW!" whereas negative reviews beat down something that (imo) deserves it.

_________________

gomorro wrote:

Yesterday was the birthday of school pal and I met the chick of my sigh (I've talked about here before, the she-wolf I use to be inlove with)... Maaan she was using a mini-skirt too damn insane... Dude you could saw her entire soul every time she sit...

I'm very surprised that all the reviews of the new Ensiferum album are negative. I don't disagree with them entirely, but usually when a big name band releases something, there are at least two 95%+ reviews that get accepted the day of release.

I'm very surprised that all the reviews of the new Ensiferum album are negative. I don't disagree with them entirely, but usually when a big name band releases something, there are at least two 95%+ reviews that get accepted the day of release.

It's often not a big-name group at all.

I've seen some fairly obscure Euro-power metal groups have, like, 3 reviews with an average of 96% and I'm like, "Oh shit! This must be awesome!" but then I notice all three are done by people with lots of numbers in their name.

So I was reading autothrall's great breakdown of why Operation Mindcrime II is shit, and I saw 4 reviews written before the album's release date. Back in 2006 this wasn't a standard guideline, so that is fine, but one of the reviews is an overly long track by track mess. Then something caught my eye as I was reading it, and I went to check our buddies at progarchives.

I get why people plagiarize, but why do people have to plagiarize bad reviews? Unless that's actually the guy using two different names and countries.

_________________

gomorro wrote:

Yesterday was the birthday of school pal and I met the chick of my sigh (I've talked about here before, the she-wolf I use to be inlove with)... Maaan she was using a mini-skirt too damn insane... Dude you could saw her entire soul every time she sit...

I used to go on the same forum as Scizzgoth, and I can tell you that he does use different names for different sites, and the review on MA is definitely his (I remember him changing his opinion on the album from despising it to loving it in the span of a few days when it first came out, and that was the review that resulted). However - he's Greek, and the guy on Progarchives is claiming he's German. Might be worth looking into further.

I though it was amusing how he used quotation marks for poppy, trve and metalcore - every time he's being particularly apologistic. The last quote is hilarious in my opinion, in how preoccupied the guy is with Trivium's genre tag. "Plentiful well of melodies" is an amusing piece of purple writing, and the second quote is very strangely worded and structured.

I've had to stop writing reviews because I'm awful at it. I can go on all day about how an album made me feel, but to point out specifics and go into descriptions is where my writing skills call it quits and go home.

Thanks a ton! And I really mean that. I used to chase after some of the greats from back in the day (Aeturnus65, OlympicSharpshooter, etc.), but I decided I'd give up on trying to be uber-prolific, as it's not my style... A shorter and more to the point overview seems to fit my writing style a little better.

_________________

Quote:

DON'T GO TO BRAZINDONESIA!!!!!! THEY LIE WITH CLAIM OF BANDS COME TO THERE!!!!!!!!INDONESIA IS ALWAYS THE YES DECISION!!!!!!! NO TO BRAZIL, INDONESIAN VERY FUCKING YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! \M\\//\

I'm having fun developing my own style these days. I like longish review, but I wrote a short one for Black Chalice, 400 words iirc, I liked it but not as much as my longer review, like my latest one for Witch Mountain (written the same day but with more booze and I think it's much better. I like to the point reviews but they're not really my style, I like silly metaphors, pseudo poetic sentences and images, all this without compromising on the music description, of course.

Ocassionally I'll get on a roll and write a fairly long review, but I find it happening less and less. I think when I write a review for something I've listened to for years, it comes a little easier...

_________________

Quote:

DON'T GO TO BRAZINDONESIA!!!!!! THEY LIE WITH CLAIM OF BANDS COME TO THERE!!!!!!!!INDONESIA IS ALWAYS THE YES DECISION!!!!!!! NO TO BRAZIL, INDONESIAN VERY FUCKING YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! \M\\//\

Ocassionally I'll get on a roll and write a fairly long review, but I find it happening less and less. I think when I write a review for something I've listened to for years, it comes a little easier...

Definitely agree. A go writing into every review (of a full-length) hoping for a minimum / maximum of four paragraphs for the sake of myself and the reader. That keeps it concise enough to where it won't like I'm dragging something out. Anything longer means I'm getting specific or delving into praise or bashing, and hopefully the review calls for that or I'm shooting myself in the foot.

_________________

gomorro wrote:

Yesterday was the birthday of school pal and I met the chick of my sigh (I've talked about here before, the she-wolf I use to be inlove with)... Maaan she was using a mini-skirt too damn insane... Dude you could saw her entire soul every time she sit...

Thanks a ton! And I really mean that. I used to chase after some of the greats from back in the day (Aeturnus65, OlympicSharpshooter, etc.), but I decided I'd give up on trying to be uber-prolific, as it's not my style... A shorter and more to the point overview seems to fit my writing style a little better.

Happy to see you're still writing. I used to have a long list of solid reviewers on my profile page, and you were on it.

_________________OlympicSharpshooter, foiled by a Captcha. That's when you know you're a sack of shit.

Yo Willytank! I really liked reading your review of that Dream Theater album. I myself own it and it was also the first I bought from the batch I own from them, and I also haven't heard it in a while. I think that deep down I fear that the "alarms" you describe may be set off by listening to it nowadays.

I'll take the blame for that one. The review was more bloated at first and I kind of helped the guy with some tips on how to make the reviews less cumbersome and easier to read, and somehow missed that blatant typo all three times it went through the queue.